Ramping - Robbo's Article in PGI 195

[JoseDominguez]

Originally posted by Raffles
It does make a refreshing change to hear that someone like Robbo take a very public stand against ramping.

Most of you know (from the PA forum) that I have always been against ramping from a safety aspect - but I soon got 'shouted down' for it (in fact, I was told "you know nothing about ramping"!).

Same goes for Mad Dog. No doubt he'll stick his 2p worth in here soon .

Once again, thank-you Mr. Robinson.

Thing is, Mad Dog took strong exception to ramping and got very angry about it. He stuck to his guns and eventually decided that he couldn't be a part of something he didn't agree with. He has a strong will and I've got enormous respect for that. On the other hand, if anything even vaguely "anti-PA" appears anywhere, you are on it like a pedantic shark.
If the PA found the solution to world hunger, you would on here accusing them of increasing obesity levels in the US.

Why don't you post on there anymore? You were only banned for a week (by Ben when you called me a Dick etc....) I wanted to keep you. I found you funny

Loads of people don't agree with ramping, no-one was ever banned because of it either. Thing is, whenever an argument doesn't go your way, you start on about people having it in for you and trying to silence you.
Robbo doesn't agree with ramping and makes a good, well founded argument that he can support..... he'll argue that point ad-infinitum and will stick to his guns (as would Mad-Dog), what neither of them would do is wander off in a petulant sulk complaining about persecution
If it mattered that much, why'd ya stop?

So, I still think ramping is everywhere, some don't "allow" it, but that makes no difference. So how do you stop it? (that's my preffered option).
But, I don't think you can..... permitted ramping is a way to minimise the cheating.. not a cure.
We can't cure a lot of things, doesn't mean we don't make things as comfortable as possible for the victims until we can find a remedy does it?

 

[Chicago]

Originally posted by JoseDominguez

Then, even if it is spotted, you have to prove it.....

Why?

Does the ref have to prove it when he eliminates you for a hit, stepping out of bounds, playing on or false starting? Of course not - the ref's judgement is sufficient, and sometimes the ref is wrong. That's part of sports.

Maybe we're going about enforcing ramping all wrong. Maybe it should just be a 25 point penalty that a ref can just call when he thinks you're ramping, and the PLAYER has to prove they arn't ramping by having a certified board. So you can either shell out your $35 or risk getting 25 point penalties all day.

Or do both - 25 points if the ref thinks you're ramping, DQ if the ref can prove you're ramping.

 

[JoseDominguez]

Not what I meant............ I mean, to impose massive, harsh penalties on a team/player e.g. a fine or a ban etc...... then you are going to take a hell of a lot of flack. Ballers will scream and shout about 25 penalty points........ what happens when they get banned for alleged ramp? One thing to aquire a penalty that affects results, but another to pass down a ruling that has a long term effect.

 

[Pump'n'Splat]

But is catching flack a reason to fold? And does any marshal find it any different to the flack they take for anything else?

In the scenario I gave a few posts ago, we were fecking fuming about 25 points for essentially what was 3 people shooting a lane that an opposing player ran straight into, but the marshal stuck to his call (overshooting). That's no different from a marshal sticking to his guns over believing a gun to be ramping...and no matter how much we gave him flack, he stuck to that call....

A certified board could then give a player recourse on a "false" call.

 

[JoseDominguez]

Yes, but the call is for harsher penalties for ramping........ bans and such. How do you enforce something like that when teams go berserk over 25 penalty points?

 

[Dusty]

Originally posted by JoseDominguez
One thing to aquire a penalty that affects results, but another to pass down a ruling that has a long term effect.

my point exactly. punishments must be severe enough to totally make short term cheating a long term disadvantage. and yes people are going to take flak. no matter how light or severe the punishment. if it was only a 10 point penalty refs would take flak.

 

[Raffles]

Originally posted by JoseDominguez
...Why don't you post on there anymore? You were only banned for a week...

I wondered how long you would take to try and start up another 'have a go at Raffles' rant.

To take this off-topic (which you seem incessant on doing - again) - I was perm. banned by Russell Smith (as well as threatened with physical violence by him) - that's why I am no longer on the PA forum - that, and the fact that I don't even want to be.

Oh, and just for the record - I never did actually call you a dick - you misread that post totally. Immaterial now.

Bottom line is - I never agreed with ramping of any sort and I was persecuted for it (other PA forum members will testify to this). I was told by Mr. Smith that I "know nothing about ramping - so shut up!".

Anyway - I don't care anymore - I still don't agree with ramping - and I don't care whether you respect my opinions or not.

Enjoy...

 

[Pump'n'Splat]

Originally posted by JoseDominguez
Yes, but the call is for harsher penalties for ramping........ bans and such. How do you enforce something like that when teams go berserk over 25 penalty points?

By certifying "legal" boards and giving a falsely pulled player some recourse?

Not saying it's as easy as that, and I should imagine it's far from it...but it's definitely a safer path and one worth persuing.

 

[Chicago]

I agree that you don't want to ban a player because a ref just thinks the player was ramping.


The problem is that a penalty that is EXTREMELY severe but that you only enforce extremely rarely isn't a good penalty. If the chances you actually get caught are miniscule it doesn't matter how big the penalty is, and that's why the current penalties are not effective at stopping ramping.

But if there's a penalty that is called FREQUENTLY, it can be much more moderate. 25 point penalties called all the time would be more effective at discouraging ramping than player bans that never happen.

 

[Raffles]

Agreed - but surely you can prove ramping the same way you can prove bouncing - ie. ref takes suspicious marker at end of game and tests it. Then the -50 and sosta comes in to play (or worse).